 |
 |
Hello Greg, There was a remarkable study of sea urchins in about 1877 by Dall. Unfortunately I do not have the reference, but it is quoted in Waselkov 1987. The latter was published in "Advances in archaeological method and theory" vol. 10. I hope this helps. Danny Dr. Daniella Bar-Yosef Zinman Institute of Archaeology University of Haifa Haifa 31905 Israel [log in to unmask] ˆø—p’† Greg Campbell <[log in to unmask]>: > Dear Dr Wigen: I personally am interested in any references with a method of > recovery included elsewhere in the same report, from anywhere in the world. > I have a vague memeory of fragmentary urchins from a Phoenecian colony in > Spain (Cadiz, perhaps?) which I would like help in tracking down. There are > also some whispers of urchins in Jomon mounds, so help from researchers > working in or around Japanese material would also be great. > > Species/wieghts reports are fine for now, and likely to be all there is in > most cases. Since urchin tests are not solid but made up of plates, they > fragment into pieces typically less than 6mm (1/4 inch). Since there has > been little chance of identifying such fragments reliably, or using them to > reconstruct urchin sizes, until now, weight and species data would be all > that could be in the literature. Species i.d. may be questionable, since it > may be based on direct analogy with modern species in the vicinity, and it is > often impossible to get to species within a genus; genera and species within > genera have different sea temperature tolerances, so the ranges of species > will not be the same through a given interglacial stage. This is the case in > the North Atlantic. > > I am especially interested in the Pacific northwest; there is a sequence of > different dominant urchins as one proceeds southwards from Alaska to warmer > waters, but these overlap in southern BC and Washington state and are mostly > species in a single genus, Stronglyocentrotus. My 'next big thing' is to > refine my method to get to species within this genus, so fine-sieved material > from along this coast (and help from a friendly local marine biologist) would > be hugely helpful. > > The eminent professor of sea urchinology would probably prefer a more general > summary text, and similar ethnography. But for me, any info will be > gratefully received. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Rebecca Wigen > To: Greg Campbell ; [log in to unmask] > Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 4:27 PM > Subject: Re: [ZOOARCH] sea urchin references > > > Hi Greg > Are you interested in NW coast information? There is ethnographic info > as well as some archaeological information. The archaeological information > is pretty much just weight and species data. > Becky Wigen > Senior Lab Instructor, > Dept. of Anthropology, > University of Victoria > Victoria, BC Canada > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Greg Campbell > To: [log in to unmask] > Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 7:40 AM > Subject: [ZOOARCH] sea urchin references > > > Dear Zooarchers: A couple of years ago I posted a request for some info > on sea urchin remains in archaeology, having been landed with a sackful by an > Oxford professor from his Breton site who expected me to know all about them > because they were shells... Many of you were kind enough to offer suggestions > and lines of inquiry. The problem of minimum numbers of individuals, size > range collected, species identification, and point on the shore exploited > were all solved even though the tests were all very fragmentary. Results > coming out soon. Must sieve to at least 2mm to get results that will allow > size reconstruction and hence shore position! > > Now one of the great men of sea urchin studies has asked for info about > sea urchins used for food (tests and not just loose spines), and I would > dearly appreciate any published references or forthcoming results for my own > uses. Prehistoric especially, but I seem to remember some remains from dark > age Scottish Isles. > > Many thanks. > Greg Campbell